Posts in Movies (20 found)
Justin Duke 6 days ago

The In-Laws

It was fifteen minutes into The In-Laws that I suspected an uncanny feeling of déjà vu, and thirty minutes in that I confirmed my suspicions with an unlocked memory of having watched it somewhere between ten and fifteen years ago, in a context I cannot recall beyond mild insobriety. With this revelation, the remainder of the plot — already formulaic and predictable — snapped into place, and I was left with wackiness and some sensible chuckle humor that I can admire without loving. This Blazing Saddles -esque style of broad comedy, which leans into action to punctuate and yet ends up deflating, is simply not for me. And I mean that sincerely. There's a lot about the film that I admire. First and foremost, the commitment to the bit that Peter Falk showcases: his dogged aloofness works in a compounding way, especially in comparison to Alan Arkin's self-serious nice — a contrast that had nonetheless grown threadbare and overdone somewhere in the film's second act. The schtick of the film feels more well-suited for a longer-runtime SNL sketch than an actual film, and the script's necessity to lampshade every single joke (the Bay of Pigs gag, to pick one) is the closest I can come to a sincere and critical critique. This and Murder by Death make two films in a row that I didn't really enjoy despite loving their usage of Peter Falk — which is perhaps a sign that I should just start watching Columbo instead.

0 views
ava's blog 1 weeks ago

my experience in brussels

For the CPDP 2026, I was in Brussels this week. The inner city with all its cute little shops, fancy buildings and barely any cars was very charming. Have some pics. We spotted Super Dragon Toys on the way and had to stop there, of course. Surprisingly, they had a lot of Sanrio, and even a blind box I was trying to get months ago that was sold out everywhere on and offline before, so I grabbed one. Got Pochacco; I liked all designs you could get in the box, so that was fine with me. I wish we had a bonsai shop: Also came across a colorful shop full of stuff around penises, vaginas, and breasts? We also went to see Mandalorian and Grogu in the cinema there; very epic layout of the room. I also enjoyed the movie; I don't get the reviews at all. Typical Star Wars fan cynicism and everything-has-to-be-dark-and-gritty-like-Andor. What was surprising is how little English is written anywhere or even reliably spoken. In German tourist-y and big cities, you have an English version of almost anything printed underneath, and often even more languages, especially when close to borders. Brussels doesn't really give the same courtesy as much as I thought it would, which caught me off guard because of all the EU buildings and employees there. Many people seem as if they don't learn English in school at all and struggle with it? I booked something a few minutes from the venue that was affordable, looked good on pictures and had a good rating. I read the top description and bottom checklist and it sounded nice. What I didn't read were the actual reviews (my bad, I know). If I had done that, I wouldn't have booked. I read them 10 minutes before arrival and it turned out that this is an AirBnB type thing posing as a hotel. The reviews called out this lie, but still rated it high (enough). A guy waited for us to get us the keys and explain everything, and we shared an apartment with a stranger that had his separate bedroom. Yup. Stressed me the fuck out. It was clean enough in the bedroom and bathroom (had one to our selves directly attached to it thankfully, because we had the double). The rest was meh. Kitchen utensils were severely lacking and often dirty. It was good enough to sleep and be gone the entire day. The stranger stayed in his room all the time, but smoked in there and it stunk through the entire apartment. We couldn't even get hot water reliably, and the sink spilled everywhere. So if you are ever in the same position... Brussels City Chambers is not a hotel, or even an aparthotel like they say. The info is hidden way below, nested between lots of other info, now saying " Comfortable apartment with shared living room. Choice between private room with private bathroom and rooms with shared bathroom. " You don't even get shown that during the booking process when you choose an accommodation, otherwise I would have noticed it then. Most of the pictures supplied are not of the property at all. So while technically you can find out if you are paying a lot of attention, you are meant to be misled if you just wanna be quick about it (and I hate booking hotels, so unfortunately I rushed through it, my bad). Big city, tourists, of course it's full! To be expected. I've been in big tourist-y cities before. But my god, now I understand why Belgians in Germany drive as if they are trying to kill you. They are also trying to kill each other in their own country. Lines on the ground get completely ignored, and so are any traffic signs or lights. The speed limit doesn't matter. Everything is a mere suggestion and they are driving like it's an off-road jungle adventure. They get mad at you for taking the rules seriously. We Germans are a rule-loving folk and get mad if people cross the street during a red light, so this was a culture clash. We were frequently honked at for following the traffic rules (staying in our lane, driving the speed limit, etc.). People just endanger others by speeding through everything, cutting you, overtaking you and almost crashing into someone else, and they don't blink long enough or at all to even let you know they are gonna swerve into your lane... they all drive like reckless, annoyed Taxi drivers in an indestructible tank. It wasn't an asshole here and there, it was everywhere, all the time, every vehicle. We soon found that we are just the odd ones. You felt it even outside the car, as a pedestrian. It felt like you weren't safe anywhere because everyone is going where ever they want, so bicycle lanes and bus lanes still had speeding cars, people almost ran over pedestrians who had the green light to cross, motorcycles drove on the sidewalk... I thought I would get ran over on this trip for sure. I also do not like how the motorcyclists can just speed past you in the middle in the tunnels without any care in the world. And how Apple Maps handles the tunnels!! They don't make it clear whether you are supposed to descend into one or keep right to avoid it. And finally, the way crossings and roundabouts are designed in Brussels is completely not intuitive and insane. I can't even explain it, but you really have to guess how you're supposed to drive, which adds to the whole messy driving culture. Multiple times, I thought we were going the wrong way for sure, but it ended up being correct. The almost complete app reliance to park is also nuts. We tried the parking machines that are spread around the streets, but they are very slow, and if you set the language to German, the process is broken and doesn't let you book anything. It's also very focused on the Belgian license plate layout despite Brussels being so tourist-y and full of people from outside the country, so entering anything with a different layout is risky and seems to overwhelm the process. It was much easier to handle in an app (Indigo Neo), but they only accept credit card; I am lucky to even have one. I expected more care around the different types of people coming into the city from a city that is the capital of Europe, essentially. If there is a next time, we'll definitely take the train, even if it is more expensive and more annoying with luggage. We went to Pure Veg India, Kitsune Burgers, Verdo, and grabbed some things to go from BS40 and a bakery I forgot the name of. Big fan of all of them, except for the dry pastries from unnamed bakery. Verdo was so amazing and my highlight of it all. I don't know if I will be back next year, also has to do with some conference disappointments... I really wanted to like this city, also because I do sometimes toy with the idea of getting more involved in EU stuff, but I think I would be really unhappy living there :< Reply via email Published 23 May, 2026

0 views
iDiallo 1 weeks ago

In the Empire's Defense

I didn't watch Star Wars when it was released. I wasn't even born. By the time we popped the cassette tape in the VCR, it was at least 15 years old. But I liked the movie all the same. It was not my favorite film by any means, but it was memorable. The first time you see Darth Vader appear on screen, you know this villain is not going to be easy to defeat. "Villain" because no one needs to tell you who the good guys and bad guys are in this movie. The visuals, the voices, the music, everything tells you that Darth Vader and the Empire are up to no good. Now I get to watch the movie with my kids. I quickly pointed out to my sons that this is the bad guy. Stating the obvious. One of them asked, "Why is he the bad guy?" I had to pause for a second to come up with an explanation. I didn't have an answer. Instead I said, "Because he is mean as hell!" They fell asleep before the movie ended. I think they enjoyed it. But I really couldn't tell you exactly why Darth Vader was the bad guy. This is just a thought experiment, don't go telling the world that I am pro-Galactic Empire, OK? I'm not digging into the lore of Star Wars. I did that already with the Galactic Timezones piece and it was exhausting. What I want to do is draw some parallels with real life. First, I think if a real-world government behaved like the Galactic Empire, they would clearly be the bad guys. But in real life, we don't have good guys or bad guys. I want to focus on just one aspect. The Empire's goal is to maintain order, or at least to try to. And the rebels are clearly creating chaos, with their freedom and what not (bear with me). Imagine what it takes to develop a system that keeps several star systems all in sync. The political process to elect senators, not just from different races, but different species. And then some religious zealots want you to throw everything you've built aside and just "feel" the force. You want to expel them as far from the system as possible. “Can one ever be too aggressive in preserving order?” — Syril Karn The rebels sabotage missions, attack army bases, and create chaos. On the surface, these rebels are clearly disruptive. I can already hear politicians calling them names and requesting additional funding for their "ally" to eradicate the threat. If the rebel attacks were broadcast on TV, even citizens of the many worlds would agree that the rebels need to be dealt with. Writers would write poems on the supposed virtues of keeping order as Kipling did in " The White Man's Burden ". All they are doing is bringing railways, law, and civilization to chaotic planets. Just think about rebels carelessly destroying a base on a remote planet whose only purpose was to track and sync time across a multi-star time zone system. Madness! But then I watched Andor. If you watch Star Wars as an adult and don't suspend your disbelief for a second (contrasting it with real life) then yes, the rebels are the bad guys. Which is exactly why Andor was a fantastic addition to the Star Wars universe. A more grounded show that I watched without my kids, and thoroughly enjoyed for how it depicted the inner workings of the Empire. Rather than focusing on the Empire as a whole, Andor zooms in on a small faction, the ISB, and shows how ordinary people end up joining the rebellion. The rebels are no longer just David fighting Goliath. Instead, you see the individual faces of people suffering at the hands of the Empire. You see the surveillance, the strong-arming, the unfair treatment, the killings. You see innocent people caught in the crossfire, labeled terrorists at the first sign of dissent. One man's rebel is another man's freedom fighter, and the Empire controls the broadcast. And the rebellion is not a single organization with a single leader. Anyone oppressed and frustrated with the Empire is a rebel in their own way. It's not good guys versus bad guys anymore. It is power exerting a crushing weight on its subjects. To hell with keeping time in sync, fight back! To hell with keeping order when all it means is blind obedience or else. Bring back those Jedis, the so-called religious zealots. But alas, it's just fiction. Real life is not the same. In our world, the Empire wins every time. Ask the Indians. Ask the so-called independent nations of West Africa. My sons, when I try to speak French with them, tell me that they are not French and neither am I. They are right, because the Empire won.

0 views
Justin Duke 2 weeks ago

Sweet Smell of Success

At its core, Sweet Smell of Success is about two men. At the beginning of the film, you think — while similar — one is decent, just desperate, and the other is beyond saving. By the end, you understand that both men are evil; the only thing separating them is the amount of power they wield. These two performances by Burt Lancaster and Tony Curtis are flatly terrific. There is little to say, because I've concerned myself much more with the 60s and 70s than the 50s, and so I can't say much about how these roles are in conversation with their prior oeuvre. But it is plainly clear that the screen bursts alive whenever either of them is talking. The rest of the film is a push-pull: a fairly standard and at times cartoonish melodrama — filled with an evil that feels more cartoonish than banal as each act progresses — rescued by the best window dressing in the world, and a whiplash script that finds entertainment and grace in its brief moments of joy. The director wrings a lot of tension out of how lovely every individual scene feels at the onset. Beautiful jazz soundtrack. Beautiful Manhattan nightclubs. Filmed and captured with just the right amount of realism. And then, the decrepit material disgust they're all wading through. I don't really go for morality tale movies at this point. While there's a certain world-weariness and hardscrabble wisdom to the proceedings here that might have been more winning with contemporary audiences, it's not exactly breaking news to me that owners of media corporations can be childish, petty, and controlling. Perhaps my fundamental flaw with viewing the film is that I think it hinges on a dwindling confidence that our protagonist is going to, at some point, snap out of it and do the right thing — even though it's so aggressively telegraphed that he won't. It seems odd to spend so much time criticizing a movie I thought was very good, so let me end with this: it is a smart, beautiful, honest movie that does not pull any punches.

0 views
ava's blog 3 weeks ago

the devil wears prada 2 - loved it

I really like The Devil Wears Prada . I saw it in the cinema when it came out, and I've rewatched it two or three years ago with my wife, who had missed out on it and the cultural impact it had. It surprised me so much when the second movie was suddenly just... there! So I went today and I am absolutely in love. I can't wait until I can see it a couple more times, maybe right after rewatching the first again, and get to draw more connections and conclusions. The following will contain spoilers. At the start, I felt so proud of Andy. She is thriving, she is accomplished, she is getting honored for her work and she has great friends and coworkers! It feels so good to see that even 20 years later, she hasn't lost her ambition and drive, and did not cave for someone else's feelings anymore. She's standing up for herself and is much more confident, too. As you are introduced into the new situation (going back to Runway two decades later), you get to be nostalgic alongside her, which feels like such a good narrative choice; so satisfying to watch. Yes, I totally fell for the nostalgia bait, the " Look, do you remember that piece of info from the first movie? " stuff. It was fun! I was greatly entertained and half the cinema was gasping and squealing at times, recognizing things and pointing at the screen. I liked seeing that some things stayed the same while some things changed, while nothing felt forced or unrealistic. People and companies progress, and while you may see yourself as the main character that people surely will remember, your presence was likely much smaller than you realize. It felt in-character for people not to necessarily remember Andy or to be aghast that she has made it further, and it felt so human for Andy to go: Wait, that process changed? Wait, we don't do it this way anymore? It was also so, so good to see Miranda again, and what they did with her. I think they handled Miranda absolutely well, especially her first appearance. A big fanfare, thrilling, slaying in a dress. She still has her quirks, the air of superiority, the earned respect, the vibe that makes you stumble as you make it into her office - but she is also a Boomer, rather old by now, and even she has slowed down and now seems slightly out of place, overwhelmed. Things aren't like they were before, and she has issues with growing in the direction the work needs to go. Work culture and expectations have shifted, and they have not been kind to the person Miranda is. She can no longer throw her coat at people to assert her dominance, as there have been too many HR complaints; now she has to do it herself. She makes the occasional outdated, offensive Boomer joke in meetings, and while a much younger employee is allowed to reprimand her repeatedly for that, nothing happens. The young workforce has gotten used to their out-of-touch leadership making these sorts of comments (" That's just who she is ") and in turn, leadership has gotten used to feeling this sort of short-lived mild rejection of their words. No more uncritical appeasement and laughing just to laugh, the air is silent now before just moving on. Miranda used to always get her way and was able to boss people around with a sharp tongue - now her power has diminished, as she is ambushed by about eight (?) people in an environment she is not used to and cannot control. As such, she is unable to defend herself and the company against a ruthless take-over spurred by neoliberal ideals, too overwhelmed to make sense of it, and feeling left behind in a world that moves so fast. She's smart and cunning, but she can't make sense of the economic babble thrown at her, and her edges are smoothed out by the fear of jeopardizing her role and the possible renegotiation of her planned, but ultimately failed, promotion that Irv never got to announce. She has to grapple with what kind of legacy she wants to leave behind, when it is the right time to stop, what else she even has going in her life, and that her attitude has cost her dearly. As a viewer, it means a lot to see how gracefully they handled the fact that even the biggest, most fearsome Girl Boss ™ is aging out of her aura and control, and it is inevitable, but not necessarily sad. We have seen Miranda's issues with vulnerability and accepting help in the first movie, and here again, she is asked to get over herself for the greater good of everyone involved. It can be quite cringe-worthy how other pieces of media handle the modern world - way too many message pop-up sounds, texts always on screen, frequent video calls, extreme smartphone reliance for plot, and more. My wife described it as "when it is like Netflix shows", and that fits so perfectly. They really utilize this to death in their shows, together with extremely temporary memes and slang that already feel slightly too old once the release happens. I'm so glad this movie didn't fall into that trap! Yes, a main point of the movie is that times have changed - Andy no longer uses a flip phone, print numbers are rapidly falling, everything moves online, content is created for digital feeds, and your audience is not leisurely consuming a fashion magazine in a glamorous way, but seeing your short form content while on the toilet. The goal is to go viral, and there's a need for a much more direct and pressing damage control now that the public can directly fill your comments and mail boxes with their criticism. All while the industry is fighting with downsizing and consolidations. Still, modern tech doesn't get a center role in the movie in this obnoxious way, and they focus more on the core issues and workplace expectations that changed, over implementing a temporary reference or trend that will age badly. They do show some memes, but they are deliberately timeless and very focused on the movie, not trying to tie a current TikTok trend into it. What also "modernized" it in my mind is that aside from making the tyrannical girlboss less relevant in the age of work-life balance and HR complaints, they clearly brought in and parodied the Silicon Valley rich tech bro, just in the characters of Irv's son Jay, and of Benji Barnes. They clearly do not follow the rules of old money, as they dress like they're going out for a hike or the gym, act too casual, childish at times even, and seem to decide unpredictably, on a whim, in this really emotionally cold way. Money without class, without pretension, but also seemingly awkward and clumsy. Benji plans to go to the sun and has stopped drinking water because he thinks it's poisonous; there are mentions of weight loss and Ozempic. Really reminded me of Zuckerberg, Altman, Musk et al. in that way. The movie is full of celeb cameos that also aided the above modern feel; thankfully, most are really subtle, quick, and in the background. I think the ones most noticeable are Lady Gaga (loved her song) and Donatella Versace. It felt fair to me; the movie had a huge impact on the fashion world and was a tribute to it, so it makes sense that the second one would also honor their inspirations and also uplift new modeling talent. It felt fun spotting all the easter eggs, so to speak. In the first movie, Andy's boyfriend Nate was a complete dumpster fire. The older I get, the worse it ages. The narrative felt sexist, and I think the writers wanted to acknowledge that in this second movie. The New Guy ™ is a genuinely kind guy, but also kind of carries the vibe of all fictional men who are sanitized to death and would love to break out in a therapyspeak monologue about what is wrong with the other character. Still, I appreciate that over Nate, so we are good. The movie could have gone without the romance altogether. It added nothing to the core plot, and the screentime was minimal. I understand what they were trying to do, though: For once, show Andy in a normal relationship, resolving conflicts maturely, and that she doesn't need to choose between love and career like the first movie made it seem. And I can tolerate that. At least we were spared absolute hetslop . Emily is such a weird character to me. I did not think she would ever become so central, and I still think it is a weird choice, and probably the only thing in the movie I am scratching my head about. I guess retrospectively, I could see how the writers would wanna let Emily get her lick back on Andy for essentially coming in and torpedo-ing all her plans and dreams in the first movie, but it still felt... odd to me. Maybe because the way Emily and Andy compete in the first is such a subplot to me in the first, as I enjoy the rest more? I guess in light of that, making Emily mean and giving her the power to absolutely ruin Andy and Miranda makes sense, but something about it feels incomplete. At the end of the first movie, things seemed pretty resolved. But a late explanation of an unanswered phone call is what we are supposed to believe is what made Emily so cold this time? Not enough for me. I am also missing more reasons to empathize with how quickly Andy is just forgiving Emily for everything, when she hasn't only seemingly been fine with using her boyfriend for money, but also wanted to make tons of people jobless, and center herself in the magazine. Wild. Which leads me to the second point: Interesting imagery. For the entire movie until the end, Emily has red hair. The color red usually symbolizes power, evil, villains, blood, pain, and sin, and red hair is often associated with having a bit of a temper. Meanwhile, after everything comes out and she is ready to make amends and start over as her boyfriend broke up with her, her hair is platinum blonde, almost white, a color associated with innocence and new beginnings. In another part of the movie, Andy and Miranda look at the wall mural The Last Supper . Miranda muses that Jesus is depicted without a halo because it is meant to emphasize his humanity and fallibility, our shared inclination to betray one another. This is obviously foreshadowing to what is going to happen later, but it's interesting that minutes later, she is depicted at a large banquet table in front of the mural, seemingly imitating it in the place of Christ. There is also a gorgeous shot of her in the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II in Milan, alone, sad, literally at a crossroads, surrounded by luxury and old, influential history. Ahhh, I wish I could write more, but the longer it's been, the more I am forgetting. I wish I could let it run on my second screen as I type. Maybe one day I will update this 8) Reply via email Published 06 May, 2026

0 views
Unsung 3 weeks ago

The land where time stood still

It’s hard to be in charge of continuity on a movie set. It would already be difficult under the best of circumstances: after all, you can’t freeze the sun in the sky, prevent hot drinks from going cold, cigarettes from extinguishing themselves, or entropy in general for doing all the stuff it loves doing. But on top of that, scenes are shot out of sequence, and movies are shot out of sequence. There are pick-ups if you’re lucky, and reshoots when you’re not. About the only time your job will be noticed is if you mess up: cue Super-man’s reverse CGI moustache, Josh Trank’s Fantastic Four wig situation, Commando’s damaged-then-pristine Porsche, and so on and so on. ( This 7-minute YouTube video is a great walkthrough from an expert .) = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-land-where-time-stood-still/1.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-land-where-time-stood-still/1.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 2x) and (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-land-where-time-stood-still/2.2096w.avif" type="image/avif"> = 3x) or (width >= 700px)" srcset="https://unsung.aresluna.org/_media/the-land-where-time-stood-still/2.1600w.avif" type="image/avif"> Apple famously freezes time on their phones in all the promotional materials to be 9:41am. The specific moment they chose is a celebration of the first iPhone unveiling to be at around that time, but it also makes production easy – while people won’t mind that the time on the screen doesn’t match the current time, or even that it doesn’t seem to advance at a normal rate, they will definitely notice if you happened to splice two screenshots with different time side by side, just because you didn’t anticipate that splice as you were preparing them. So it’s easiest just to avoid this situation altogether. But what I didn’t realize until today as I was recording the previous post’s screengrab is that 9:41am is also enforced whenever you record your phone’s screen via QuickTime. It’s a peculiar feeling: Start recording, and the time on your phone jumps to 9:41. Yank the USB cord out, and it’s back to where it was: Oh yeah, the date changes too, for the same reason – to January 9, 2007. In a time-honored Apple tradition, I can’t decide whether I’m annoyed at it (there seems to be no option to turn it off), or admire it.

0 views
Justin Duke 1 months ago

What's Up, Doc?

What's Up, Doc? is, I guess, just a perfect film. I can remember exactly one other movie of its ilk that I watched with sheer glee — amazed by how contemporaneously funny it was, by how awful it was, and by how obviously, in retrospect, it influenced so much of the genre: the-thin-man . But even more so than that film, What's Up, Doc? is all gas, no brakes. The commitment to screwball never wavers, not even for a single second, ramping up and up and up in abject silliness until — as Babs says in a memorable closing line — you simply surrender to its tidal wave. Here's a confession I'll offer in lieu of anything interesting to say about this terrific, hilarious film that I recommend wholeheartedly: I don't think I've actually ever seen anything with Barbra Streisand in it before. In one of those self-reflexive memes, I know her more for the Streisand effect — literally the name — than any specific work of art. Until now. And she is so completely winning in this, in a way that I don't think I've actually seen from any other lead actress. It is rare for Hollywood to let a lead actress be funny, horny, and charming all at once. The industry, if it deigns to let women be sexual and possessed of a sense of humor, usually consigns them to the realm of the character role, or tries to diffuse things with some other means — i.e. fat jokes. But Babs here, who is in many ways the original manic pixie dream girl (albeit perhaps more of a nightmare), is an absolute tornado. I'm not sure I would find her as charming as her male retinue does, diegetically, but she commands every scene she's in and demands your attention, never letting pesky things like pathos or logic get in the way of her Looney Tunes sensibilities. Just an absolute delight.

0 views
ava's blog 1 months ago

how i enjoy movies

I'm not much of a movie watcher. I somehow prefer watching multiple episodes of a TV show over a few hours over investing 2 hours into a movie. I get antsy in the second half of the movie and episodic stuff can more easily be paused for a break. My wife has gotten me into more movies the past few years though, especially the recent months. Catching up on classics like all the Star Wars movies, Lord of the Rings 1-3, American Psycho, Fight Club, some popular Studio Ghibli movies, some old genre-defining horror movies, and more. What makes movies a lot more bearable to me is talking about them while watching them, even pausing the movie while discussing. I know many people hate this and just want to watch something in peace, not tear it apart during or even be interrupted. Understandably, they don't want the fantasy and make-believe to be destroyed during. But my wife and I are on the same wavelength about this. She is my favorite person to watch movies with because of this. It would bore me to death to sit through 2+ hours in silence, just staring, and then both of us moving on from it and just saying "Yeah it was good.". I need to have some breaks to readjust my position, get something from the kitchen, drink some water, and have minutes in-between just psychoanalyzing characters, giving our interpretations of things that are still unclear, or saying what we would do if we were the characters. Also discussing the broader context, production, if something was real or CGI... I love it. It keeps me engaged, and it makes the movie more memorable for me. I also learn so much more about it and plot details I would have otherwise missed get revealed to me. I especially love watching something with my wife when it's something she is really interested in or has seen multiple times. Last night, we watched an Indiana Jones movie ( Raiders of the Lost Ark ), and I got so much info from her during it. "Harrison Ford improvised this scene because he was tired of reshooting it all the time." "In this scene you can spot C3PO and R2-D2 in the background. And you can see the Ark in the background of a Clone Wars episode." "I think this shot is actually a matte painting on glass." I'm more of a Lara Croft person, and so we also talked about the similarities and differences between the two, especially with Lara's reboot content and her grappling with the fact that her work tends to cause more harm than good, something Indiana doesn't seem to have to face that much. We also discussed some silly stuff; like how the snakes would realistically survive in that pit, and whether a bunch of snakes are flammable or not. All while watching it and occasionally pausing. Technically, we also do this for TV shows. Severance and Pluribus especially, but even X-Files . It's just so good! I just need to engage with someone about what I'm seeing and pick their brain about an aspect of it. Acknowledging something was produced, these were all actors, this didn't really happen, this was CGI, this is a plot inconsistency etc. doesn't ruin the entertainment for us at all :) Reply via email Published 11 Apr, 2026

0 views
Justin Duke 2 months ago

Mistress America

I'm sorry, I know you liked Brooke. He told me that she worships you, she kept talking about how smart you are, how interesting... Last year I watched Liberal Arts , which may have been the single worst quote-unquote college movie that I've seen. Lazy, boring, and incoherent. In contrast, Mistress America nails not only being a college movie, but being a New York movie and a farce with specificity, flair, and warmth, and manages to do all of these things within the confines of a 97-minute runtime. No mean feat. I do feel like, for better and for worse, my analysis of the veracity of any of these films boils down to me coming out of the metaphorical theater thinking and then nodding my head and being like, "Yep, that's what it was like." And in Mistress America, that's what it was like. I did not have the same experience that Lola Kirke's character did. But the details were so hyper-specific and accurate, I could see so many people I knew like her from my time at William & Mary. What's more, the Greta Gerwig character serves as an equally hyper and honest depiction of that kind of late-twenties driftless coquette without ever being cruel or mean unnecessarily. Much of this is, I think, delivered on the hands of Gerwig's performance and screenwriting. Baumbach, I think, is a director who needs Gerwig. Baumbach, I think, is a director who needs Gerwig more than the other way around. The surrounding cast is all pitch-perfect, too — including the second-act Connecticut set, who once again are drawn with broad comedic brushes without feeling particularly flat or cardboard (another problem with most films in this genre.)

0 views
Justin Duke 2 months ago

Stop Making Sense

A polite man is driven to murder. He becomes a prophet and screams manifestos on love, war, and the increasingly alarming impact of technology and progress. Driven to insanity by his own insights into the human condition, he travels to a river in an attempt to drown himself but instead is baptized and absolved of sin. He dies, crosseyed yet painless. This is the definitive fairytale of my generation, and the moral is "watch out, you might get what you're after". Jesus lives, and he's wearing a giant suit. A film that is so flatly and universally beloved by all who watch it, regardless of affiliation with the band itself. And truth be told, I don't really care much for the Talking Heads — not that I dislike them or their music, but to me they are one of many bands that I can recognize the artistic and aesthetic value in at an intellectual level more than a Dionysian level. (And I don't really prefer my listening to be pleasurable on the intellectual level.) What did I think about while watching this excellent film, a master of its genre? I thought about the greatest concerts in my life: Lost in the Trees playing in the tea house in Charlottesville, an equal number of band members and audience members; Blind Pilot playing in the Crystal Ballroom, an entirely acoustic set and an audience willing enough to go along with it; CHVRCHES at the Paramount in Seattle, sweaty and glowlit. What Demme captures here is that same indelible feel of the best live music, where you feel in the same breath and beat both completely alone and completely surrounded by the only people who matter: building, building, higher, higher. I have half-joked with friends over the past couple years that I'm done with concerts as a medium. The event no longer holds any sort of allure outside of special occasions (once-in-a-lifetimes, family). The highest praise I can give this film is that it made me reconsider that stance.

0 views
Justin Duke 2 months ago

21 Bridges

A derivative, predictable, competent crime thriller. If you read that sentence and think "good," then you will like this film, and the opposite is true as well. The banality points to the banality of everything about this film — it seems to avoid contrivance and missteps and misfires more than it goes out of its way to court success. Boseman is wonderful, but his character is given absolutely nothing to do besides act with competence and rationality. The standout — the one character both written and portrayed with any sense of moral valence — is Taylor Kitsch as a trigger-happy dude who is both clearly insane but also cares deeply about his companion. When thinking about this movie I am drawn to a comparison with the-rip , given that I watched it so recently, and I find myself at least grateful for the economy in this film's runtime and its willingness to trust that the viewer is at least spending their time watching the film and not scrolling on their phone.

0 views
Grumpy Gamer 2 months ago

Tomorrow Never Came

Here is a movie I made with my friend, Tom, back when I was 15 or so. We were sure we’d be the next George Lucas or Steven Spielberg. Little did I know a few years later I’d be working at Lucasfilm and Steven Spielberg would call me up for hints on Monkey Island. He couldn’t use the 1-900 number like everyone else. The movie has sound, but it was lost when it was transferred to VHS and this goofy music was added. In case the Smithsonian wants to preserve the movie as historically important, here is the link.

0 views
Justin Duke 3 months ago

What Happened Was

Two of my absolute favorite films of all time, albeit for very different reasons, are My Dinner with Andre and Before Sunrise . Both of these films, which I highly encourage you to watch more than anything else I talk about if you haven't already done so, are about the enchantment and sucker of one single really interesting conversation. The two films diverge pretty heavily from there. My Dinner with Andre is a film about work, fulfillment, and status. And Before Sunrise is a film about youth in love. But the beauty in both comes from not just their simplicity and formless structure, but in the recursive nature of the dialogue, just like in real life, where a pregnant pause or a sidelong glance suddenly carries with it enormous weight after understanding not just the comment but the 75 minutes preceding it. What Happened Was is interested in that last thing too. And in the unraveling of yourself that happens when you spend time being intimate in a literal sense with anyone. But is more interested in a funhouse mirror look at the human psyche. And has perhaps more cynical and caustic things to say about the way people express themselves through others. Our dual protagonists are a paralegal and an executive assistant. Both seem a little off, but not wholly so. And then, over the course of the worst first date in the world, we watch the characters reduce themselves to mania. This is an uncomfortable film to watch. Rather than transposing yourself into Andre and his counterpart, or Jesse and his counterparty, you find yourself just kind of internally screaming on behalf of both characters who have a Lynchian sense of bizarre behavior. In terms of inspiration, this draws more from Waiting for Godot than Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf. The dread you feel is less from a place of sadness and understanding and more from a sense of shock and increasing bewilderment. And to that extent, it flatly did not work for me quite as much as I hoped. But as in all two-part plays, the film ends with two monologues, one from each character, where they lay bare the things that at that point are almost nakedly obvious to us, the viewer. And while I can't say either monologue or scene was particularly well written, I will say that both of them will stick with me for a long, long time. (I'm not sure the preceding seventy minutes earned those monologues, but that's a point beside.)

0 views
Justin Duke 3 months ago

The Hudsucker Proxy

When does an indulgence become sour? I ask this because indulgence is the word that most immediately comes to mind at the finish of this film. And largely in a negative way. Closer to flippancy than resplendence. And yet the same word can be leveled at the last film I watched. Ocean's 12. A movie which I thought, on the merits, was not exactly good, and yet I had a good time with it. It's a weird pair of films to compare. The filmmaker is perhaps less so; it's not unreasonable to consider Soderbergh and the Coens in the same relative stratosphere, both in terms of longevity and breadth of work. HudSucker Proxy was made very early on by the Coens. Ocean's 12 was made perhaps at the peak of Soderbergh's cache. Where and for this being such an early film in their canon, the technical achievement is remarkable. This film looks and feels beautiful and striking in a way that I've described as obvious, but not unwelcome. One of the reasons why, deep down, I love the Oceans film so much is because you get the very strong sense that Soderbergh is cooking up for you the most delicious and expensive meal in the world. It is a project where he is alchemizing his pleasures and giving them to you, letting you get swept a lot in the exact same way he would be, and that is very much not the goal of The Hudsucker Proxy. Frankly, it's difficult to tell what the goal of the film is beyond technical wonderment and perhaps a skewering of lesser film. One gets the sense that the Coens are making fun rather than having it. The pastiche here runs the gamut from boardroom drama to His Girl Friday, and speedruns the list of clichés, many of which are funny in isolation. The script is, if incoherent, extremely clever, peppered with one-liners and callbacks. But... you leave the movie with a kind of unfulfillment. The Coens can both be humanistic, but I simply do not care about any single member of this group. What's worse, I'm not sure I'm supposed to.

0 views
Justin Duke 4 months ago

Ocean's Twelve

This might not be the perfect time or whatever to talk about it but I've been doing my homework and I'd really like to play a more central role this time around. I consider this film's prequel as close as you can get to a perfect film. Ocean's Eleven is a movie that knew exactly what its goal was—to be as relentlessly and easily entertaining and pleasurable as possible—and succeeds in doing so more than any other movie with similar ambitions. The sequel to such an endeavor has an inherently impossible task ahead of it. I held off on watching this for a long time. Partially because it seemed unnecessary; why would I watch a sequel when I could just watch the original again? And partially because it is poorly reviewed, in the same way many of Soderbergh's works are. The phrase self-satisfied and bizarrely sloppy comes up a lot in reviews of his early-aughts output. I think it's fair to be upset. The heist in this movie is, to a certain extent, on us , the viewer, for sitting down and thinking that we were getting treated to a heist movie when instead what Soderbergh wants to give us is two hours' time in the companionship of people who are effortlessly beautiful and charming. This film is filled with metatext: the Julia Roberts bit, Clooney's age, Matt Damon trying to become a leader. You can accuse some of the smaller bits as rehash, and I agree with the central complaint that a plot twist which invalidates everything we've seen for the preceding hour is unsatisfying. At the end of the day, I didn't care that much because I enjoyed watching my buddies having fun. It is a lesser film; it still succeeds in its goals, with grace and panache. One more thing: this movie hints at creating a slightly larger mythos, in the same way John Wick eventually created an extended universe unto itself. While part of me would have loved to see six more of these films, I think the key to their enduring charm is that they are a snapshot in wide frame. The warmest and happiest scenes involve as many people as possible, whereas the formula of John Wick really only requires a single protagonist and an endless barrage of faceless, unnamed fodder.

0 views
A Room of My Own 4 months ago

2026-2: Week Notes

This week felt like a slow, slightly awkward return to routine. I worked from home , which I’m grateful for, but with the kids home (summer holidays) and my mum visiting, it took a surprising amount of energy to focus and do anything at all. Not productive necessarily. Just not completely stagnant. I noticed how easily I slip into managing everyone’s time and behavior when I’m physically around. It also made me notice, again, where most of my mental energy actually goes outside of work. One big chunk goes into managing my food and weight (as much as I hate to admit it). The second big energy drain is navigating the kids and electronics. (I am just mentioning it here, but I plan to write about it some more later). A bright spot was spending time creating my 2026 direction. I realised I don’t really want achievement-style goals right now. I want a way of being. My central theme is “Let myself be happier.” With gentler yoga goals, I managed to do yoga every day this week (15–20 minutes). I can already feel the difference. I went for almost two weeks without it and could feel myself getting stiffer. It doesn’t take long at this age. On the fun side, I’ve been watching Dark Matter and thinking about regret and the paths we don’t take. I’ve always enjoyed Blake Crouch’s work. It’s slightly terrifying and bordering on hard sci-fi. I also discovered (and loved!) Pluribus . If you’ve watched it, do the Others remind you of ChatGPT or other GenAI? (to save from spoiling it for anyone, I won’t say why). Family movie nights were dominated by Avatar rewatches and finally seeing the latest one in the cinema last night. It’s three and a half hours long, which honestly felt offensive. I kept thinking, who does James Cameron think he is, taking that much of my life? It was beautiful and fine, but not three-and-a-half-hours good. I would have happily traded that time for three more episodes of Pluribus. That said, the kids loved it, especially my (almost sixteen year old) son. My husband had a terrible cough, so I ended up sleeping on a mattress on the floor in my daughter’s room so everyone (maybe not him) could get some sleep, especially with my mum in the guest room. It reminded me (again) how much I care about furniture being practical and multi-use. I still regret not insisting on couches you can properly sleep on. Where I come from, all couches can become beds. It just makes sense to me. I don’t like furniture that only serves one purpose, no matter how pretty it may be. This also nudged me back toward the idea of doing another round of simplifying at home, not because the house is cluttered, but because less always feels lighter to me (makes me feel lighter, I guess). I will make a plan. Maybe start in February or so. Socially, I’m moving toward my 2026 direction of hosting gatherings and bringing people together. Drinks with a neighbour, lunches with my mum and the kids, and long phone calls with friends overseas. The first gathering of neighbours for 2026 is booked for next Saturday (granted, my husband organised that one, but nevertheless). I’ve been thinking more about how many social catch-ups become pure life recaps and updates rather than shared experiences. The life itself is lived somewhere else, not inside the friendship. I’d like to experiment with hosting and gatherings that create something memorable together, not just conversation. That idea has been sitting with me. Because of that, I’m feeling more drawn to creating gatherings that have some kind of purpose or shared experience, not just conversation. I’m reading The Life Impossible by Matt Haig. I usually enjoy his books. The lessons and themes tend to be obvious, a bit like Paulo Coelho, but that’s part of the appeal and probably why they’re so popular. And also, I have no idea where this book is taking me. It’s also nice to see an older protagonist. The main character is 72. I also just finished Better Than Happiness: The True Antidote to Discontent by Gregory P. Smith, a memoir I picked up from the library intending to skim, but it fascinated me enough to read the whole thing. There were some really nice insights around acceptance, self-acceptance, anger, and learning how to actually live in the present moment. “In some ways, it’s a paradox. To change something we first have to accept it for what it is. Only through accepting my perceived flows and limitations? Could I see that there were pathways to improvement? The same applied when it came to learning to accept one of the biggest conundrums in my life, the man in the mirror. Self acceptance is the main reason I’m not only here today, but able to look at myself in the mirror.” Overall, the week felt reflective. I’m noticing how hard I still am on myself and trying to soften that. Self-acceptance! If this year really is about letting myself be happier, then noticing these small choices and energy leaks feels like the right place to start. PREVIOUS WEEK: 2026-1: Week Notes One big chunk goes into managing my food and weight (as much as I hate to admit it). The second big energy drain is navigating the kids and electronics.

0 views
Justin Duke 4 months ago

Eternity

Love isn't just one happy moment, right? It's a million. And it's bickering in the car, and supporting someone when they need it, and it's growing together, and looking after each other. It can't be denied that this movie isn't really, really funny. Some of the runners, such as the Korean War bit, or the pretzel bit, were just great laugh lines from a writing team — and I think the film's willingness and steadfastness not to engage in the minutia of the framing device and its acting mechanics was a very smart choice, because that's really not what the movie is interested in whatsoever. In general, I think this movie wa sa success and I attribute that success to the script's unwillingness to take the easy way out. I appreciated that all three vertices in our little love triangle are fairly flawed in different ways: The movie fades in quality in the few instances where it stoops to melodrama - mostly in the middle act, which any viewer is going to know beat by beat, and therefore goes on entirely too long and with way too few laugh lines. Given the audaciousness of the framing device, the movie did not quite take full advantage of its visual possibilities. The little sequence of Elizabeth Olsen gaping between eternities was legitimately cool, as long as you didn't think about it particularly hard — but the most beautiful and interesting parts of the film were in the junctions themselves, rather than the paradises. (Perhaps that is a deliberate metaphor.) The movie that comes most readily to mind, having watched Eternity, is Palm Springs : also a high-concept rom-com that never takes itself too seriously and has legitimately hilarious moments 1 And a bit of sloppiness. which, in a different world, probably could have been a massive box office success — if its goal was, at all, to land in the box office. This is a vehicle largely for Miles Teller and Elizabeth Olsen to be charming: and while they share almost zero chemistry, their individual charisma makes up for it, as does a great collection of complimentary performances from their surrounding cast. (The movie also owes a lot to The Good Place, of course, but Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind which is perhaps winkingly echoed in the title.) This is not high art — nor is it pablum. I want more of these films! Elizabeth Olsen isn't given much to work with, but the text of her character has a little bit of scuminess, and she sells the pathos strongly enough. - Miles Teller's character is, for sure, guilty of everything that his rival accuses him of - in the same way that we all have a little self-interest burrowed deep in our heart. - And Callum Turner's character is clearly has some anger problems and a bit of subtextual one-dimensionality — the traits that you do ignore as a 25-year-old newlywed, but would grate on you after 65 years of marriage.

0 views
Justin Duke 5 months ago

Cameraperson

It seems fitting that, to close out the year I finally watched Koyaanisqatsi, I also got to watch Cameraperson — which is in many ways, and none of them dismissive or demeaning to either film, a funhouse mirror of its antecedent. Koyaanisqatsi is a film that's very interested in collage and rapidity, and at times felt like a sensory HIIT where you feel the push and the rest and the push and the rest, and the cavalcade of stock washes over you. Cameraperson is an antithesis — is collage, yes, assembled from around a dozen or so vignettes, all of them quiet, both literally and figuratively, but meticulously placed so that you, the viewer, are given the space and time to form the connections yourself. The dialogue in this film is spartan; the visuals are arresting and deliberate. Nothing feels wasteful. Kristen Johnson is very interested in relationships between storytelling and memory and between identity and witness. She is interested in the vastness and fragility of human existence. She does not have many answers; she wants you to help her find them. The best movies take you places: sometimes that is into someone's head, sometimes that is into a Nigerian NICU. She takes you there quietly, never flinching, never letting go of your hand. I don't know what else to say. I think it's somewhat disingenuous to call it an entertaining movie, but it's certainly an enchanting one, and I am different and better for having watched it.

0 views
Justin Duke 5 months ago

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

This was a really fun, silly movie—one I probably watched in high school and that very well might have become my entire personality. In a way, we're all better off that it didn't. About halfway through, I found myself thinking how deeply it reminded me of The Nice Guys , and felt quietly pleased with myself for realizing that Shane Black wrote and directed both films. They share the same strengths and the same flaws: a weak third act, where the obvious avenues of pastiche run dry and the movie retreats into generic, gratuitous action-movie spectacle. But at their best, these films are vividly alive. They pull off something that's genuinely difficult for pastiche: sustaining suspense about what's serious and what isn't. The jokes land, the timing holds up, and comedy—when it's done well—ages surprisingly gracefully. There are a few spots where this isn't quite true, and the occasional dip into melodrama cheapens the experience a bit. Still, that's a hard line for any film to walk, and this one does it better than most. Robert Downey Jr., playing a caricature of his pre–Iron Man self, is entertaining if not especially novel. The real standout, though, is Val Kilmer, who threads the needle perfectly, delivering his performance with exactly the right amount of irony. The bit parts remain just that—bit parts—and Michelle Monaghan does solid work, never tipping into manic-pixie-dream-girl territory or pick-me energy. Overall, it's just a really fun time—the kind of movie I'd happily rewatch in six months. My only substantive complaint is the same one I have with most of Black's filmography: the unnecessary thirty minutes of dull, overindulgent action scenes. They add nothing. Every moment not spent letting the three leads spar and riff off one another feels like a wasted opportunity.

0 views
Justin Duke 5 months ago

Wake Up Dead Man

There are three ways to evaluate Wake Up Dead Man: as a This was a very, very entertaining two and a half hours. I did not care for glass-onion , its predecessor, and I think this recovers from all of its missteps: the humor and plot are a little tighter, the script is a little less indicative of Rian Johnson spending too much time on Twitter, and the setting, production value, and aesthetic are all immaculate. But, moreover: Josh O'Connor's performance is not just good relative to this extremely accomplished bench of players in the background (Glenn Close! Andrew Scott!), but ascendant in its own right. Father Jud is probably the most interesting character in this entire series outside of Blanc himself, and O'Connor brings him to light with a nuance and warmth missing from even the sympathetic characters in this series. Between this and Challengers last week, I suddenly have a deep and great appreciation for this burgeoning young actor. 1 Not exactly a hot take, I'm aware. I think this movie's first goal is to entertain and delight, and its second goal is to seriously engage with its motifs on faith and doubt: where it succeeds in the second, it is on the back of Father Jud. (And in particular, the construction worker scene — you know the one — is Johnson at his finest, zagging from comedy to pathos and avoiding whiplash.) As a whodunit The contract between reader and writer of a whodunit is important . The joy in this medium, especially when executed well, is a real sense that you, as the reader or viewer, could have put the pieces together yourself — the joy in consumption is active because while you're enjoying the text of the work, you also get to try and be one or two steps ahead or behind the creator. This sounds obvious, but one of the reasons why Agatha Christie is, well, Agatha Christie, is that she knew how to balance this perfectly. The average Poirot mystery had you entering the final act with a handful of suspects who you all had reasons to believe were guilty, and were rich enough in their character that it wouldn't be completely out of left field if they ended up being the culprit. The best parlor scenes, accordingly, were less about filling in the gaps and more about drawing a through line between disparate clues that you had already picked up but had not connected. And here even more so than the previous two entries Rian Johnson fails. A bellwether of a bad parlor scene is length: it takes us around 20 minutes of flashbacks to go from the reveal of whom to the conclusion of why and how, much of it muddled and incoherent. What's worse, is that the Greek chorus of guilty suspects don't get crossed off so much as they simply fade into the background — don't get me wrong, it's fun to see Kerry Washington and Andrew Scott in these bit parts, but they are given tremendously little to do, are essentially miscast, and just like in Glass Onion , they do not feel like people so much as caricatures of people whom Rian Johnson wants to write a couple jokes around. Christie's novels work because you could see just enough introspection and motivation in all of the characters—not just the obvious one or two—to keep your mind racing. No such luck here: the ensemble never coheres. As a Knives Out sequel Much better than Glass Onion; arguably as good as the original film, though that had the relative freshness of its approach to buoy it. There are very few reasons not to watch this movie, and my quibbles are small: I would love to watch a new one of these every three or four years until I die. A couple other notes: film; 2. whodunit; 3. entry in the Knives Out canon. Josh Brolin's character was himself fairly flat and cartoonish, but Brolin delivers the performance with enough glee and menace that I didn't mind. I'm not sure when Brolin started shifting in my mind from a fairly generic actor to someone who knew exactly how to play against himself (Maybe it was Hail Caesar) but I'm almost never not excited to see him on screen. - Once again Johnson resorts to lampshading his influences (this time with an explicit syllabus!)

0 views